-Iolaus-Sure, I agree this is all too sleazy to even be happening, but there you have it. It's real.

And I think its nuts to say McCain can't run for president because his father was working overseas and he was born there. He is an American citizen from birth, is he not?

As for Obama, are you claiming he was not born in Hawaii? There is another claim, that he had an Indonesian passport, which precludes his being an American citizen. Personally, I don't care, but it is pretty likely that in the intervening years he became a citizen.

I would consider McCain native born, and almost certainly Obama as well. A non native is someone like Henry Kissinger.

Questions Surrounding Trig Palin's Down's Syndrome

Sarah Palin has stated publicly that she knew her baby had Down's prior to delivery. Almost half of children with Down's have heart defects, and some of these babies need surgery very quickly after birth. There is NO WAY that any physician would counsel, allow, permit, or encourage a woman in labor at 36 weeks with a known Down's baby to travel 12 hours, opening at least the possibility of an unattended birth, and then allow her to give birth at a regional hospital without NICU facilities. There's a lie here somewhere. a. First (and most likely) possibility, she wasn't pregnant and was hurrying back for her daughter's (probably early) birth. However, she was leaving the conference early and she needed a reason. She used the obvious one, never anticipating that what was said in Texas would ever be seriously compared with what happened in Alaska. b. Second possibility, she was pregnant but lied about calling her doctor from Texas, who has chosen not to dispute the statement and is now covering for her. This – at the very least - demonstrates her as someone who would show very poor judgment regarding her infant's life, and would be willing potentially to put flight crews and fellow passengers in a terribly awkward situation. Can anyone even imagine the headlines if the governor of Alaska had given birth on an airplane? And this still doesn't explain why her physician allowed a older mother (44) to give birth to a child with a supposedly known problem four weeks early at a small community hospital with no NICU facilities. c. Third possibility, she was pregnant but she did NOT know the baby had Down's prior to delivery and this story has been put out subsequent to the birth to "enhance" her pro-life credentials. In an interview done right after the birth (available on the Anchorage Daily News website - the ten minutes sound file is on the right side of the page) she talks about finding out through vague "early testing" that Trig had Down's but never actually states clearly when this happened. Here a link to a transcript of the sound file. (Here's another link to an April 22, 2008 pro-life website repeating the idea that she knew through "early testing.") The idea that she knew at a specific point early in the pregnancy was, at least as far as I can find, never put out publicly until several weeks later. The first reference that I can locate that states specifically that the Palins found out in December , when Sarah was supposedly four months along, is found here.

"I do realize how corrupt the world is, which is why I wonder if it is possible for someone like Obama to either be any good, or to do good if he wants to, or to live long if he tries."

Obama---for good or for evil---has had an effect on many, many people. It is more than mere rhetoric. If it were only rhetoric it would stimulate but it would not enthuse. The things he is saying, the chords he is striking, seem to be mysterious and 'inner' sentiments. Obama---again for good or for evil, no one can yet say---has succeeded in touching the inner, emotional and even 'moral' core of people, and they respond. In fact, we all respond in one way or another. Taking into consideration the present (utterly strange) financial events and the insecurity it feeds on and exposes, and taking into consideration (taking it on 'good faith') that many people DO have a core where there is 'goodness', a desire to do 'good' and to take steps toward 'making things better', I suggest that Obama and the sentiments he provokes will have a dramatic effect. "Drama' being the operative word.

I perceive a kind of battle, a struggle, between conservative religious factions and an emerging faction that is also Christian, but neo-Christian, or post-modernist Christian (if you can deal with the term). For good or for evil, something really unique is on the verge of emerging. It is a far more relevant, far more potent, and far more meaningful interpretation of the Gospels. It will soon come out of the woodwork in unusual and even 'mysterious' ways.

It is quite possible that none of it will turn out well though. In that sense it may be entirely a tragic upwelling or resurgence, a movement with a tragic outcome. But that is all in accord with the internal narrative that is Christianity. It may very well be that it doesn't turn out as anyone might hope, but what is far more interesting is what people may or will do even though this is true.

Just in these last few days we've seen that---indeed---things could move right to the brink, to real calamity. That is such an interesting twist in the establishment of a certain kind of 'mood' where strange and magnificent drama is expressed.

FoxNews holds a debate over whether or not it was fair of Newsweek to put an unretouched photo of Palin's face on the cover. As if the ton of makeup and hairspray wasn't enough to disguise the woman so much that it is a cinch to find a double for her to use for a parody, they think that she should be Photoshopped too or it is "unfair" to her?

There's probably no need to click the link. I just included it to prove that there really was such an inane debate on a news channel.

-Elizabeth Isabelle-As if the ton of makeup and hairspray wasn't enough to disguise the woman so much that it is a cinch to find a double for her to use for a parody, they think that she should be Photoshopped too or it is "unfair" to her?

-tomas-Sarah Palin is a fan of SNL and (we're in that age group, too) the rumor is .. she will be appearing before the election. Obama was going to appear and NBC heavily advertised this, but hurricane Ike happened and the campaign (string pullers) cancelled him out. Lorne Michaels then 'shifted gears' and said he'd no longer announce (advertise) when politicians would host/appear on SNL due to "scheduling problems" popping up, you know, World War 3, or whatever.

And, in the same article - an infomercial as to why you should select Obama - instead of looking at Joe Biden's mannerisms, vocal tics. He being a polished "senator" with an impeccable as some sort of 'constitutional expert' clearly he isn't.

He doesn't even understand the difference between Article One and Article Two, when referring to the duties of the vice-president's official duties.

PS - I read other articles fronted below, "why Obma and his wife" would be good .. Yup, run down John & Jackie Kennedy, (really just a couple of meth addicts) how their marriage was one of convenience.. why no comments about Bill & Hillary -gleefully omitted- but why. Another couple of husband/wife lawyer teams.. And George & Laura abortion differences, this was talked about before the 2000 election - old news.

Then, the same article, once again, goes about saying why a Palin presidency would be dead meat, and then launching into another infomercial about Obama, blah, bla de bla.

The John McCain article more self-serving bullshit by the authors..

Why would they omit an article about a Joe Biden presidency .. obviously .. clearly, they haven't a clue.

Jeez, Brad, surely you can find some article a bit more level .. not so, Obama... Come on, I betcha you've already voted early, you pessimist. (did you get a free carton of cig's for posting that article here)

Are you still in high school?

Do you wear pumps?

PS - If I decided to vote this time around, probably write myself in (perhaps the girlfriend? but only with her permission) we try to do our darndest to fly below the radar.

"If I decided to vote this time around, probably write myself in (perhaps the girlfriend? but only with her permission) we try to do our darndest to fly below the radar".

But clearly this is not the case. You have your political affiliations, your preferences, and you have certainly HAD them, and acted on them, in your work with lobby-ism and/or PR.

Though it is next to impossible to get a clear sense of what you are really up to, and what (in the fuck) you really mean to say, enough gets through that I think I have a sense.

There are some people (duh!) who are indeed pro-Obama and do not conceal it, just as there is a whole faction that is adamantly pro-McCain and don't conceal it. One can be pro-Someone and still engage in 'fair journalism' just as one can engage in all the worst forms of journalism.

If I had to put a style on your 'journalism' I'd describe it as slightly jaundiced because you are essentially dishonest about what your platform really is.

Joe Biden went to my high school, Archmere Academy, in DE. It's a rigorous private school, now co-ed. If he was even an average student there and had not attended college or law school, he would still understand the world, its geography and history and how they give rise to current events better than Palin.

I have never been a big Biden fan. He's a politician. Politicians are smarmy. But the idea of having him sit in the Oval Office is infinitely preferable than the idea of Palin somehow inheriting the seat.

Why vote for McCain? Suppose he's your man and he gets elected. And suppose he gets your own political agenda on track and you are glad you voted for him. What then? If he somehow survives his first term, do you elect him for a second term? Why vote a man into office who, if he turns out to be a great president, would be too old to repeat? And for his first term, at least, the second in command is Sarah Palin? They are trying to groom her into Presidential Material in a few short weeks. If they can pull it off, do we want or need someone so malleable as commander-in-chief of the armed forces with the nuclear codes?

No offense, Tomas, she might be a straight-up gal and she sure is better looking than Joe Biden. But she lacks education. She is an embarrassment already. If McCain would have picked Giuliani as a running mate, I would have to rethink my vote. You would likely trot out some link to a story about Giuliani's personal affairs, of which there are many juicy examples. But you would have had a man who managed NYC's budget, which is second in size only to the federal budget, and who has political savvy.

And let's not forget while you question the morals of Obama and Biden, Palin's own closet isn't exactly devoid of skeletons, either.

They say some people have greatness thrust upon them. I pray to god it is not thrust upon Sarah Palin any more than it already has been. Of the four people in the race, she is the only one who would make an even worse Chief-Executive than George Bush. Feminists always said that if a woman is going to make it in a man's world, she has to be twice as smart as the men in the field. Is that what we think? That Sarah Palin is twice as smart?

Either way, we will have a first in the White House this year, the first woman Vice President, or the first black President. He's the right black guy. She's not the right woman.

Currently, a biography called "Sarah: How a Hockey Mom Turned the Political Establishment Upside Down" by Kaylene Johnson is #5 on the paperback nonfiction bestseller list at the New York Times. Originally, another author, Amanda Coyne, had the contract to write the book. According to the "Alaska Ear," a column in the Anchorage Daily News, here's why she chose not to write the book.

"She hadn't traveled. She couldn't name her favorite book. She doesn't struggle with any kind of the big issues of the day. She has not experienced anything like adversity. It took her five colleges to get a journalism degree. Her mother didn't know who Sarah's idols were. She also didn't know how she became the kind of born-again Christian she says she is. She couldn't remember Sarah having interest in public policy, or in reformist movements, or in anything, much, except for sports. Both Sarah and her family are obsessed with Trooper Wooten."

I'll repeat something I said in a previous post: This is a woman that John McCain apparently believes, that should he die, would be qualified to take on Vladimir Putin, the former head of the KGB. Regardless of how one feels about Sarah Palin, this is the best reason I can think of not to vote for John McCain.

Iolaus wrote:Good points, Brokie, but how much do you think Ghouliani knows about the real 9-11?

I think he has heard all the conspiracy theories that people such as exGov Jesse Ventura espouse. I've heard some of them, too. They seem to center around George Bush senior and Dick Cheyney. All I can say is Cheyney appalls me, but I think of him as more of the ultimate opportunist than any kind of mastermind.

In his speech in Clayton Hall, "On the Threshold of the New World Order: A Rebirth for the United Nations," Biden said the world's leaders must adopt a new understanding of security. "Collective security today must encompass not only the security of nations," he said, "but also mankind's security in a global environment that has proven vulnerable to debilitating changes wrought by man's own endeavors."

"Thus, in setting an American agenda for a new world order, we must begin with a profound alteration in traditional thought," he said.

here i thought NWO was evil hulkster's wrestling gimmick back in the 90's :Djk hehe

Personally I'm more afraid of the old world order, as we can clearly see how much the old money has used and abused our world and its people, A NWO would be like the philosophy behind fight club, an opposite to the ways of the OWO, otherwise its just the same old shit, rich getting richer, profiteering off wages-slaves who get poorer and poorer, but don't realize it due to all the techno gadgets tossed at us to distract us from the ever widening rift between the haves and the haves not.

There is no NWO there's just the OWO that has been around since the first primitive chief passed his wealth on to his idiot son (think Bush jr. 10 000 years ago :D )